Opinions welcomed...thinking of taking a gamble on an '04 with 248k miles on it.....not sure what engine is in it.....Thanks!

 

163 views and no opinions or comments......feel like I must have stepped out of line here........not sure why though.........I know nothing about either the 3.0 or 4.0 engine....that's why I asked......I remember when I was graduating from my '94 F150 with 5.0 to my '99 F350 with the 7.3 Diesel going on the '99-'03 PSD forum and many people gave me pointers as to what to look for in my first Diesel-I have been a member of the FTE for over 15 years, 7 with the PSD forum alone and always can depend on help when I need it there, and likewise offer my advise to others that are newcomers....I have heard that there is a "cult" in the Ranger owners/followers, don't fully understand that though..........I've owned an '85 and an '88 Ranger myself a few years back that were bought brand new.......not new to Rangers by any means.......Sorry guys but I feel like a black sheep as a visitor here.

 

Can't help you on this one, the only Ranger I have owned so far was a 1988 with the 2.3L engine. I am currently looking for an 89-92 with the 4.0L engine but would take one with the 3.0 if the price was right. That is why I am lurking in this forum. For me, I just want the most hp and torque, so the 4.0 is my choice. However, I have heard the 3.0 is very reliable.

Jim

 

Nobody thinks you're out of line. What you're seeing is more likely to be apathy.

My personal opinion is that the 4.0 is a better engine. It has more power and the gas mileage is reputedly as good as, or better than the 3.0. My '04 is the most reliable Ranger I've owned.

 

I personally have owned two 3.0 B3000 Mazda / Ranger......I don't need the hp or torgue, and I have found the 3.0 very reliable. If I was to pull or carry a camper, I would probably move up to the 4.0......any time you buy a truck with 248,000 miles on it, you are taking a chance. If it has regular maintenance, ie oil chances etc. then it could go for another 100 no problem......but you just don't know. A friend recently bought one with 300 on it, it lasted for 50 then had ate a piston.

Either way....good luck, and sign up for updates so you know what to look or listen for.

 

For '04 the 4.0 is the SOHC, right? And the 3.0 is a pushrod motor, right?

Buy the 3.0.

The SOHC motor is about done, even with the better chain guides they used after the first few years. Sure, it could go another 50k, but it could crap out the next time you start it.

ymmv

 

Thanks Guys! I HAVE found out that the truck does have the 3.0 engine:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Vulcan_engine

 

3.0 better mileage but low power. 4.0 good power poor mileage pick you poison.

 

Good advice. I am happy with my 3.0 but I only pull a small utility trailer with it.

 

The 3.0 is a good reliable engine. I have one with 249k on the odometer, owned since new, in a Sable. The newer models have a CKP - cam sensor - that does not get lubed, more or less, and will make noise before failure, and finally will quit driving the oil pump.
The 4.0 is related, loosely, back to the 2.8 from Cologne, Germany. I am not too fond of the OHC version and the 'chain cassettes', as they are wear items, and expensive to replace. The 2.9 version had noisy lifters, and heads that cracked. I *assume* some of that was corrected in later versions. A friend had a 4.0 in a Aero* with over 200k miles that got ~19mpg all the time. The fuel regulator (made of unobtainium - $180) failed and the mileage went to 9-10mpg. Easy fix, but almost 200 beans. It ran well, but because of access, some of the vacuum lines got oil soaked, weak, and would pop off the 'tree' leading to misfire. Almost impossible to reach as buried as that engine was. Ranger install likely easier to work on.
Other than that, complaints on the 3.0 are mostly about fuel consumption and 'lack of power'. I think somehow FoMoCo picked 'just the wrongest gear' possible for the 3.0, and are putting it into a bad spot for torque or fuel economy. It should run well, as I have a 2.3 that has decent power, and gets ~25 mpg with no special fuel saving tactics used.
If you get the 3.0 check the cam sensor, and while someone moves the cranks pulley, watch to see how far back and forth you can move it before the sensor starts to move. I don't think the gizzards are visible w/o disassembly, so just grab the crank pulley and rotate back and forth to see how much free play there is in the chain before you run into cam & valve spring resistance. I replace my gears & chain @~180k miles as I didn't know if the cam gear had plastic teeth, and knew plastic got brittle in 'hot oil' and the dentition could fail at the most inopportune time. The teeth were metal.
tom

 

Thanks Again Guys for the opinions and experiances!

I ended up passing on the truck with 248k on it......it had been a work truck for a pest control company......never saw it, but the owner was very honest that it was pretty well worn out.

Onwards and upwards......looking at a '99 4.0 now......(see my post "1999 4.0??")

Thanks Again!!

 

i've been researching also. From what I read the 03-04 4.0 can get the timing chain slap and the pass. side chain is on the back side of the Engine so you have to pull engine or drop trans to service. It dont sound like it happens alot but can and in 05 its not a ig issue.At least that is info I read.Any trans issues?

 

My 2002 4.0L has been very good to me with 110000 miles.

 

i have 95 ranger with 3.0 and 300456 mile on it .

 

I hope mine makes it this far. If so, it will probably outlive me.